Argument Made in Favor of the Iron Mountain Despite Elon Criticizing it for Being Outdated [US Office of Personnel Management (OPM) processes and stores federal employee retirement paperwork]

Iron Mountain

Elon Musk has recently criticized the use of an old limestone mine in Pennsylvania, operated by Iron Mountain, where the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) processes and stores federal employee retirement paperwork. Musk claimed that the facility is inefficient, saying that retirement paperwork is manually processed and stored in a mine, with the speed of a mineshaft elevator determining how many people can retire from the federal government each month (he mentioned a cap of 10,000 retirements per month). He argued this is a wasteful and outdated system, suggesting that such data could be stored digitally on a chip instead.

On the other hand, there are counterpoints from various sources, including OPM employees and Iron Mountain itself. Multiple OPM employees, speaking anonymously to local media like the Butler Eagle, have said Musk’s comments are inaccurate—specifically, they claim the facility doesn’t even have an elevator, and the processing of retirement paperwork varies case by case, not based on some elevator bottleneck. Iron Mountain’s CEO, Bill Meaney, has also responded, framing Musk’s criticism as a potential "growth opportunity" for the company, noting that Iron Mountain works with over 200 federal agencies on digital transformation, not just paper storage. Analysts and reports, like those from Snopes and CBS Pittsburgh, confirm the mine exists and is used for storing federal records, but they also suggest Musk’s portrayal might exaggerate or oversimplify the inefficiencies.

So, who’s right? Musk’s point about government inefficiency and outdated systems has merit—there’s truth to the idea that manual paper processes in a limestone mine sound archaic in 2025, and the federal government has historically struggled with modernizing its IT systems (e.g., the OPM has spent $106 million since 1977 trying to update its retirement system, yet manual processes persist). However, his specific claims—like the elevator bottleneck or a strict 10,000-per-month cap—seem either exaggerated or outright incorrect based on what OPM employees and Iron Mountain have said. The facility is real, it’s used for storage and processing, but it’s not as cartoonishly dysfunctional as Musk described.

As for believing Musk over "her" (I assume you mean a specific critic, though you didn’t specify who), it’s not about picking sides based on loyalty. Musk’s track record shows he’s often bold and visionary but also prone to hyperbole or oversimplification for effect (e.g., his gaming controversy or past X posts). The critics here—whether OPM employees, Iron Mountain, or journalists—have provided specific details that contradict Musk’s narrative, and those details align with older reports (like a 2014 Washington Post article) about how the facility actually operates.

Keeping an open mind, as you suggest, is wise. The truth likely lies in the middle: Iron Mountain’s setup is indeed an example of government inefficiency and outdated practices, which aligns with Musk’s broader point about bureaucracy. But his specific claims about elevators and caps don’t hold up under scrutiny, suggesting he’s either misinformed or exaggerating for impact. The facility’s existence and purpose aren’t in dispute—it’s been public knowledge for over a decade, as X posts and articles note—but Musk’s framing seems more dramatic than factual.

I have a hard time believing that Elon Musk is wrong and she is right, how about you?
But we will keep an open mind, because we are open-minded.